January 17-23, 2005
Mark your calendars now for an historic week of pro- life events to commemorate the 45 million babies who have died since Roe v. Wade decriminalized abortion. Operation Rescue will kick off Phase Two of our ground-breaking “Year of Rebuke” campaign, targeting late-term abortionist George Tiller’s “Web of Death” as never before!
If you cannot come to Wichita, we invite you to participate with us by praying for these events. -OR Staff
“Have nothing to do with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.” -Ephesians 5:11
_____
Monday, January 17, 2005 – NOON
Press Conference at City Hall (downtown) to announce Phase Two in Operation Rescue’s campaign to stop abortion in Wichita. Last year we promised to find those who support and profit from child killing in our community and expose them. You will be shocked to learn what we have uncovered!
Tuesday, January 18, 2005, 7-9 AM
Rescue Outreach, Protest, and Press Conference at La Quinta Inn, 7700 E. Kellogg St., (at Rock and Kellogg)
Press conference will be held at 9 AM. OR will release new information about the role of La Quinta in Tiller’s killing operation and will offer help to pregnant women as they leave the La Quinta to begin their late term abortions at Tiller’s mill.
Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 11:00 AM
Protest and Public Announcement at Wesley Medical Center (at Central and Hillside). Operation Rescue will announce it’s new campaign to expose Wesley Medical Center to the community as a top-tier abortion collaborator in Tiller’s Web of Death.
Friday, January 21, 2005 – Three Events!
12-1:30 PM – Rescue Outreach at Women’s Health Care Services, 5107 E. Kellogg
4:30-5:30 PM – Candlelight Vigil Remembering the Victims of Abortion, especially the “Least of These,” the most vulnerable victims of abortion: babies with disabilities. 5107 E. Kellogg
7-9 PM - Roe v. Wade Memorial Service, Central Christian Church, corner of 29th and Rock
Saturday, January 22, 2005, 9 AM — 32nd Memorial of Roe v. Wade
Tour of Shame of Abortion Mill Workers’ Neighborhoods. Meet at Tiller’s Mill (5107 E. Kellogg) for prayer. We will be spending the rest of the morning and early afternoon exposing the truth about what abortion clinic workers really do for a living and praying for their repentance. Maps of the tour stops will be available at the meeting site.
Sunday, January 23, 2005, 8:30-10:30 AM
Special “Minute Man” activity. Please call the office at 316-683-6790 for details.
I am an atheist, and I am Pro-life. You guys should push your beliefs in a more non-Christian way. More people will listen to you, if you mention ‘Jesus Christ’ less. Please save the babies
As professional obligations preclude my traveling to Wichita for next week’s invaluable pro-life activism, I will certainly commit myself in heartfelt prayer for your efforts.
As each and every person is bound to the primacy of his or her conscience in all things, I must also express my grave concerns for the activities of January 22. Yes, this most sorrowful anniversary has implicit resonance for so many of us. Yes, I have faith that ORW and its constituents will avoid violence at all costs and maintain a peaceful protest.
However, there are those among our society who do not adhere to the same standards of which Jesus commands us.
Therefore, I must beseech you to avoid all measures which would render anyone vulnerable to harm. By allowing morally bankrupt individuals to be apprised of the addresses and phone numbers of clinic workers, I fear that calamity could ensue. Yes, we are all beholden to our consciences, and as Christians we would wish for Jesus to inform those consciences.
My conscience is troubling me now – deeply.
A call to repentance – and a sincere, prayerful and peaceful effort to transform another person’s heart and vocation – are wondrous things of which our Lord is rightfully proud. Rendering others vulnerable to harm is something I cannot live with. I beg you to consider this as you conduct your ministries on January 22.
songbird – prolife outreach has been held every january since 1973, and there has yet to be any of the “calamity” you refer to. in fact, over the last 30 + years, only a handful of abortionists and/or abortion mill workers have been hurt or injured as a result of any violence.
compared to 40 million + babies that have been killed, it’s a pretty small percentage.
it doesn’t excuse the seven or so that have been harmed, but i don’t think you need worry about the january events as being in any way conducive to violence. january is about reminding america that a baby dies every 20 seconds or so from legal abortion, and it’s always been done with a great deal of class and dignity. i would be greatly surprised and even shocked if it were not so again this year.
Dear Bird,
I, for one, WANT TO KNOW when a murderer or his accomplice is my neighbor.
You will not likely read this reply, because I am sure you are working hard to shut down the sex offender registry. There is a much higher rate of vigilantism against pedophiles and other sex offenders, than there is against abortionist.
While I do not condone anyone.. er uh, “preform a procedure on an doctor with a rifle” (to use pro-abortion terms), I think the the world should know about what they do – and those taking part (in even the slightest way) should be ashamed. Shame is something our country seems to have lost.
Ann:
A few rather salient points here about respecting life – ALL life:
Number #1: Do not put words in my mouth. I am not working to shut down the sex offender registry. To be blunt, I have no sympathy for sex offenders, especially those who rape and maim the young. No one has the right to murder these individuals – but my heart is cold when it comes to them. I’m just being honest here. My feelings aren’t particularly Christ-like – but they are mine nonetheless.
Number #2: As I am a post-abortive woman who was fully compliant and complicit with her own abortionist 30 years ago next month, I do not wish to be compared to sex offenders – or for my erstwhile physician to be compared to sex offenders. I wish to be repentant, certainly. Denying my 16-year-old self of so many years ago – that is hypocrisy.
Number #3: The evils of abortion deserve to be made known. But those of us who share in the extended arena of this sin do not deserve to be murdered. Furthermore, (as if I haven’t already made my point in previous posts) – many of us who have undergone a change of heart about this issue were not acting in a murderous spirit so many years ago. My own priest exuded compassion and God’s love and mercy – so surely no lay person deserves the right to usurp my own confessor in this regard.
Show me any rapist who “doesn’t know that what he or she is doing is a violent act.” Violence, harm, humiliation and destruction are the modus operandi of any rapist. Too many individuals (myself included) needed to undergo a powerful change of heart to fully realize the evils of abortion. Don’t compare me to Mary Kay Letourneau, Ann, because I just don’t accept it.
So, let’s be clear here: I fully support the sex offender registry. I fully support ORW and other like-minded individuals who seek to transform hearts and minds about this critical issue.
I do not, however, support those who honor Paul Hill as a sadder-day saint – and who would emulate his actions accordingly.
Hullooooooooooo!
Where to start?!
To the professed atheist, several questions:
First of all, you either not an atheist or you are intellectually dishonest. You can’t be intellectually honest and an atheist for the obvious reason that you do not possess absolute knowledge; and, that being the case, must at least concede that God could exist outside your limited realm of knowledge. That’s agnosticism or skepticism, both of which can be honest postions, but it is not atheism, which cannot.
As evidence that you do not possess absolute knowledge, why would you even ask why ORW doesn’t seek to conduct activities which are essentially Christian in a non-Christian way?
Neither atheism, agnosticism, or skepticism, per se, acknowledge a transcendent moral law such as rescuing the innocent; Christianity does. If you are going to thus attempt to steal the moral high ground from Christians, can you not see how that in itself reflects upon the bankruptcy of your own world view? If you cannot see even that reflection, how can you call yourself “bright”, as I’m told is common now among professing atheists?
A genuinely atheistic approach to child-killing is to ignore or encourage it. In a way it doesn’t make sense; if this is all there is, then you ought to at least try to improve it and not make things worse here, and the last 32 years have proven that legalized murder does not generally improve matters on earth, with the exception of the abortionist’s bank accounts.
But it is how most (I did not say all; Dr. Bernard Nathanson became an ardent prolifer in the mid 70’s but remained an equally ardent atheist for some years afterward; Nat Hentoff, prolific writer, journalist and civil rights activist is another rare exception who has been pro-life for years and is, as far as I know, still professing atheism) professing atheists I’ve met deal with the matter, driven as they seem to be more by blind faith in their amorality than by any reasonable desire to improve things on earth for most of humanity.
And, ah yes, Paul Hill…venerated by some, distanced and demonized by most of the prolifers I know, continues to speak eloquently though dead now for over a year.
Some of his reverberations…
Folks, WACHET AUF. Whatever you think of him and his last actions on the abortion battlefront nearest him, the bottom line is that THIS MAN WAS EXECUTED WITHOUT A TRIAL FOR POLITICAL INCORRECTNESS, NOT FOR MURDER, AND I CAN PROVE IT. Here goes:
1.) the reason he was denied a trial is that he intended to plead the necessity defense; i.e., he acted in legitimate defense of real, weak, innocent, people who were in real mortal danger at the hands of a serial killer.
2.) No one who claims to believe in the humanity of the unborn can gainsay him on that, and it is a defense which would have stood solidly had those on whose behalf he intervened been, say, 5 years old…already born.
3.) Had the endangered children already been born, he would have most likely been granted a trial, set free, AND VENERATED AS A HERO for acting as he did. Doubt this? Imagine a bus carrying, say, 15 or so 5 years olds (however many babies were scheduled for execution that day at that mill in Pensacola…) on a field trip, hijacked by some nut on a “mission” to rid the world of the life-sucking parasite known as 5-year-olds, with a couple of accomplices. They are screaming or petrified with terror (please see “The Silent Scream” if you haven’t already) when…light flashes accomanied by cymbal brush and rapid arpeggio…one man rushes onto the scene, takes on and takes out the hijackers, and saves the children from certain death.
That is what, in Paul Hill’s mind, he was doing; the children were just younger, unseen, and therefore unidentified with by many who can be seen.
Most pro-life activists I know would not do what he did, and would have tried to discourage him had they been there. For my own part, I’d have probably joined them, having personally opted for the non-violent route; but I can’t help wondering whether the same prolifers who condemn him would also have condemned the Warwaw Ghetto uprisings, etc…and if so, on what grounds? For it is the same holocaust, motivated and backed by the same idealogues and moguls, just in a new guise.
(For further evidence and insight on that matter, see eugenics-watch.com and related links; there is also a fascinating online read concerning this, “Eugenics and other Evils” by G.K. Chesterton. Look them up; they’re both worth the time and effort.)
All that said, the fact remains, whatever you think personally of Paul Hill or his actions, he was executed for political dissidence, not murder, without trial; and that in itself I find more tragic, ominous, and evil chilling than his actions.
Moving on…for a balanced perspective on violence towards already born persons on the abortion battlefield, see abortionviolence.org.
And before you even imply a penchant for violent tactics on the part of ORW, at least find some proof of it first…
just thinking…
To ORW, wish I could join you in person; but don’t see that happening this time, so will definitely be with you in spirit.
Slan, everybody!
Dear friend,
This week I turn 32.
It’s hard to believe. How time flies. January 22, 1973 seems like so long ago. I’m the oldest in my family. It’s a pretty big family, but I’ll explain that later.
If you’re a baby boomer, you probably don’t think much of my generation – Gen X. But that’s because we’re a threat to you! My generation is changing the world! Just think of all that has happened in the world these past 32 years …
The end of Vietnam. Watergate. Jimmy Carter. Actually, I don’t remember much from the 70s, since I was just entering elementary school when Ronald Reagan became president.
I loved the 80s. That’s when I grew up, but I had no idea just how much the world was changing.
Then, the Berlin Wall fell. I’ll never forget that day in November, 1989. I was 16 and on top of the world. I can remember my history teacher telling me that the world would never be the same. He was right.
Then, something even more dramatic developed. The Internet. If you want to understand me and my generation, then go on-line. When I was in college, a few of my friends saw it coming. We helped start a revolution on-line. And don’t believe it when they say the Internet bubble has burst. The only thing that has burst is the old way of doing business.
Now there are no boundaries for people like me. The sky is truly the limit! I got married three years ago to a beautiful and loving woman, and we’re expecting our first child in three months. A new generation begins …
Yes, life is good. Except for one problem.
You see, I wasn’t actually born on January 22, 1973. In fact, I wasn’t born at all.
I never was given the chance to take even that first breath … never mind then 381 million breaths that would have followed over these 32 years.
Not a single breath.
That’s because of something else that happened on January 22, 1973.
Seven justices made a decision that would dramatically affect my life … and the lives of 40 million others who would never take a breath.
That’s my family. And it’s growing every day. In fact, in the next 24 hours the family of abortion victims will grow by about as many people who died when the World Trade Center buildings collapsed.
The 9-11 cleanup concluded after nearly a year, but our cleanup – the one from 1-22 continues.
And to think it was all based on a lie. Jane “Roe” of Roe. Wade was lied to. And so were you – if you believed even for a moment that the mass of tissue wasn’t a human life.
That mass of tissue was me!
My goal here isn’t to make you feel guilty. Rather, think of me … or what could have been me … the next time the topic of abortion comes up.
Think of me graduating from high school and going to college.
Think of me getting married and having children.
Think of me celebrating my birthday this Wednesday with family and friends.
Think of me turning 32.
- Anonymous
Mr. Axiom:
Have I missed something here? I’m moving this discussion to the Forum, per the Webmaster’s admonition that debates not be conducted on this forum.
Bird, and anyone else so inclined,
As I have nothing to add to, take from, or apologize for, in my previous post, I don’t see any need to join you in the forum. Have a nice time there, though!
Double-A:
Fun? Fun, did you say? No, I’m not having too much mirth of late – and not much merriment, neither.
Besides, it’s a pivotal week for Pro-Lifers, and today was the Sabbath – and trying to find a non-Catholic church which takes a definitive stand on this issue is harder than Dolly Parton trying to locate her training bra.
Why, it’s just one more inexplicable facet of life (like your rhapsody to Paul Hill) that I find, well…..inexplicable.
arx
your defense of paul hill seems to be
somewhat qualified, and also, rather confused. you say he is “venerated by some, distanced and demonized by most of the prolifers I know” and then go on to say “whatever you think of him and his last actions on the abortion battlefront nearest him…”, etc…
the fact is that you can’t defend murder while claiming to oppose murder.
the comparison you made to a lunatic on a bus
is interesting but not relevant. the thing you’re missing is that women who ‘choose’ abortion have chosen to get on that bus and have a legal right to be there. i oppose abortion 100% and want roe v wade toppled and legal protections returned to the unborn. but i know that can’t be accomplished by lawless deeds. i think we should do everything possible to dissuade them from going through with the abortion decision, provide alternatives, work legislatively to restore protection for the least of these, etc….
but we can’t kill people and then turn around and say we oppose killing. if any one thing has hurt the prolife cause, it is people such as paul hill. we have to win this one heart at a time, one life at a time. we won’t win it by killing abortionists, no matter how we try and justify it.
you’re right in saying that most prolifers (i prefer to think all but about three or four radical nutcases) feel that paul hill was wrong in what he did. you stand with a very very small minority.
and so, while your response to songbird was cute, it just shows that you do not have a perspective that will lead to a “respect for life” mentality among the populace. your view, and that of paul hill, is one of justified violence to end violence, which makes no real sense whatsoever.
perhaps God is totally prepared to undertake judgement of Paul Hill. Perhaps we should cocentrate on what will be my answer to the Almighty in regard to the continual unabated slaughter of the most unprotected made in His image. Read Ezekiel 3:17-21, Luke 17:2 and Matthew 12:36-37. I Thank God for the leadership contact and look forward to meeting you again. May the Holy Spirit continue to make us uncomfortable, You are in my prayers daily.
Jerry & songbird both (and anyone else similarly inclined),
Do go back and read, and reread, my comments on Paul Hill IN FULL AND VERBATIM before posting any more tripe distorting both my views and my words on this.
For all your criticisms of that post, neither of you seem up to your usual standards (such as they may be; it is, of course, possible that I have misjudged you both as blatantly as you have both misjudged me on this and other matters in the past) of perceptiveness, and other traits, common to you both (with the obvious exception of verbosity)…and it would be, I think, a very good idea to bring those as far up to snuff as you can BEFORE presuming to judge either me, Paul Hill, or anyone else.
My response to Songbird anticipated, rightly, the sort of interpretation you and she both have treated us all to and was not posted to be cute; it was, like all my comments on Paul Hill, as on other matters, simply a statement of facts as I see them against the backdrop of His story, past and in the making.
Glowing with anticipation of meeting you both one day in person…
THANKS!
Cordially enough,
arx axiom
arx
nobody distorted your views. your hypothetical about kids on the bus was obviously a defense of justified violence. and in fairness, if those were the circumstances, then yes, taking out the ‘bad guys’ who were threatening the children would be appropriate. but what your analogy missed is that in that particular scenario, kidnapping and attempted murder are illegal. and so, anyone who stopped those men would be a hero, and a court of law would be apt to give that man a medal, rather than try him for some offense.
but as much as we prolifers hate it, abortion IS legal. we MUST work to change that, and are doing so. but we won’t win friends and accomplish our goals with violence. dr. king, whose birthday we recently marked, knew that in regards to the cause of civil rights. and clear thinking prolifers understand the same about our cause.
paul hill’s actions must be condemned, because we can’t use violent means to oppose violence. he doesn’t “speak eloquently, though dead for over a year”, except as a stain on the prolife movement. i am sorry that he was not treated well during his trial – if true, that is wrong – but his actions were illegal and not morally justifiable. and as i’ve stated, 99% of prolifers agree that we won’t win this battle by killing off abortionists one by one.
i hope, for the sake of the movement, that you come to that realization yourself, instead of trying to elevate paul hill to sainthood status.
As i said, jerry…
Mr. Axiom:
I DID read your post in its entirety. If I misread portions of it – or all of it – I apologize. But I sincerely believed you were offering (guarded) acceptance of Paul Hill and his tactics. Neither Jerry nor I are unintelligent individuals, sir – and the fact that we both came to the same conclusions is not without resonance here.
I would not be averse to meeting you someday – provided you are not someone who tacitly encourages the use of force to bring others into submission. Overtly coercive tactics, whether aural, oral or physical, can be just plain traumatizing.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got to get this mental imagery out of my head:
Yoko: (in high falsetto uber-squawk) – “I am woman, watch me roar…..”
Helen Reddy (in her normal voice): – “In numbers too big to ignore…..”
Andy Dick (in low, Alto(id), uber-drone): “And I’m never gonna go that way agay-un….’Cause it’s just an embryo – with a long, long way to go….”
Oh, Lord – help me here. I can’t take much more of this.
Oh, Please.
Neither you nor jerry actually answered the one question actually raised in my comments about Hill, not as a referendum on lethal force (which clearly bugs you both no end), but to substantially challenge this condemnation of Hill, in a more relevant than you care (or dare) to face or admit, documented historical perspective. So, as I said, and will say again…
Posted in memory of all the babies slaughtered by legal induced abortion since Roe, and for all those now whose lives sit in the balance in killing chamber lobbies, lonely bedrooms, classrooms, and elsewhere across the all-too-defruited plain…
Where did you come from, baby dear?
Out of the everywhere into here.
Where did you get your eyes so blue?
Out of the sky as I came through.
What makes the light in them sparkle and spin?
Some of the starry spikes left in.
Where did you get that little tear?
I found it waiting when I got here.
What makes your forehead so smooth and high?
A soft hand stroked it as I went by.
What makes your cheek like a warm white rose?
I saw something better than any one knows.
Whence that three-cornered smile of bliss?
Three angels gave me at once a kiss.
Where did you get this pearly ear?
God spoke, and it came out to hear.
Where did you get those arms and hands?
Love made itself into hooks and bands.
Feet, whence did you come, you darling things?
From the same box as the cherubs’ wings.
How did they all just come to be you?
God thought about me, and so I grew.
But how did you come to us, you dear?
God thought about you, and so I am here.
– George MacDonald
To Jerry, shame on you for using the women in such crises as human shields for your attack on arx axiom. Makes me wonder where you’ve been for the last 32 years…women do not choose abortion like they choose ice cream flavors or shoe styles, but like animals caught in traps “choose” to injure themselves to secure what they view as “freedom”…not realizing how seriously such freedom can be limited by such injury.
It’s the abortion injury that uses moms and babies as human shields in their war against both.
Keep up the fight, ORW, arx, & friends…
For goodness’ sake – Axiom!
Haven’t you ever heard of humor as a defense against absurdity? Please! I actually HAVE heard that awful 1973 song with those three none-too-soothing singers – assaulting my cerebral vortex without mercy – or subtlety. I was trying to be funny, for pete’s sake!
You’re about as funny as a stick!
Now, “unintelligent” is generally not a word I use to describe myself these days, so I truly don’t know what I missed in your quasi-defense of Hill. Instead of asserting your own intellectual superiority, you might try enlightening me on what I missed while I was striving mightily to drown out the most horrible Japanese melody since the bombs dropped on Hiroshima…….
Kelly M.,
Thank you for pointing out, again, the obvious fallacy of the “choice” lie.
Obviously, this is so much our cultural”default” position that even ordinarily reasonable prolifers like Jerry apparently fall into without thinking. For some fresh, well-done articles on that matter, see http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42462 and
http://www.augustafreepress.com/stories/storyReader$30822
In thinking on your use of it to try to discredit the bus analogy, Jerry, I don’t think it’s legitimate. Many of those gassed to death by the Nazis may have been said to have “chosen” go to the Nazi’s gas chambers in that many of them weren’t coerced; they were misled to expect “a nice, refreshing, de-lousing shower” — no doubt very enticing after the filth and rigors of the concentration camps…and no doubt especially, and diabolically, delicious to the Nazis, in adding the stinging insult of betrayal to the final injury of death to most of their victims.
Women today are misled to expect concerned, legitimate, reasonably regulated, compassionate
healthcare when they enter an abortion mill…which looks to them, in a time of desperate crisis, as welcome as a real shower would have been to a slave of the Third Reich.
What the Nazis neglected to tell those they “chose” for execution, of course, was that they were the lice of which Eastern Europe would be “refreshingly rid”…much as America’s Death Camps deliberately withhold much vital information from the women entering them. Also, one of the witnesses at the Nuremberg trials testified that the Nazis had a number of chambers where pregnant “dysgenic” wombs were emptied virtually round the clock. (Can’t be too careful; after all, nits make lice…)
My question to you then is this: since many went quasi-willingly into the gas chambers, would that have been a legitimate argument against the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, the efforts of General Patton and allies…? I still haven’t heard from you on this, and it seems to me that since it is the one question I actually threw open in my much-maligned & yet more misconstrued comments on Mr. Hill, it would behoove you (& bird) to have the decency to answer it before launching your ad hominem ad nauseam attacks on, or any other response, towards me.
To Bird, if I have somehow failed to supply you with your daily laughs, it is because
a.) I was, and am still, unaware that I was/am responsible for that.
b.) While I am aware that many people use humor as a pressure valve in dealing with distresses of all sorts, somehow I don’t find the topics of holocausts, fascism, etc. to elicit the laughs you seem to. Perhaps that will change someday; I know that God will have them in derision, and I am hoping by His grace to be with Him as he gets the longest, loudest, and last laugh on all evil…and, I don’t feel any particular imperative to condemn Paul Hill, myself, or anyone else, because you say I must.
All that said…I hope…here’s another imperfect, but heartfelt and essentially true,
word for America, especially the unborn and all responsible for their abuse.
This rhyme is in memory of children we mourn
Who were brutally killed before they were born;
And to those who are yet from the womb to be torn;
we call them “the least of these.”
One wintry day back in seventy-three,
“America the beautiful” became history;
“The home of the brave and the land of the free,”
but not for the least of these.
Unthinkably turning their backs on humanity,
With Roe versus Wade they legalized insanity;
Like the preacher of old who said “Life is but vanity,”
they sacrificed the least of these.
Forty-five million have already died
But where have we been as they silently cried?
All we like sheep went astray in our pride,
failing to care for the least of these.
Their blood cries to God from the depths of the ground;
While His people (the Church) go in circles round and round,
With preaching and teaching that’s “doctrinally sound,”
but mentions not the plight of the least of these.
Though we each have a Congressman representing our views,
Have we urged them and pleaded, “Let the ‘Least of them’ choose?”
Or have we rendered to Caesar and slept in the pews,
not speaking up for the least of these?
“We the people” are guilty, we all share the blame;
We need to repent and recognize our shame;
If we call Jesus “Lord,” let’s be worthy of His Name
and show His love to the least of these.
Not just the children, but their mothers as well
Are in need of assistance, some need a place to dwell;
Most need a friend with whom their story to tell;
of how it feels having conceived the least of these.
If we just had more time to persuade girls to wait,
If we get their attention before it’s too late,
We could point them to Jesus, His love is so great
that He poured out His life for the least of these.
Let us pray and add feet to our prayers day by day;
We must love from the heart, and let God have His way;
“Let them come,” Jesus says, “Welcome them, welcome Me.
Harken to the cries of the least of these.”
“Rescue those unjustly sentenced to die;”
This verse, to abortion would seem to apply.
For the glory of God, let’s you and I
stand in the gap for the least of these.
Our trust is in God, not in men or in law;
We seek treasure above, not in wood, hay, or straw.
To obey Him is best though we win, lose, or draw
as we lay down our lives for the least of these.
With our gaze firmly fixed on our Savior and Friend,
Bringing to His throne daily our broken hearts to mend;
Let’s repent of indifference and serve to the end
the Lord of the children, the least of these.
Written by Douglas Gwinn. Permission to use is granted.
L’Chaim,
Mr. Axiom:
Whew! And you say I’M verbose………..
Turning toward catatonia now, so I shall sign off.
Catatonia?! Delightful spot, a friend of our son’s just got back from honeymooning there. Breathtaking sunsets, very accessible islands to get “stranded” on — great for romance, or just to reflect, meditate, pray, unwind, get the creative juices inspired, plus the most quaint little sidewalk cafes…just watch your wallet, though, you know how some of these “best-kept-secret” romantic / tourist attractions can be…
cheers,
Catatonia is the name of a honeymoon spot? Well, that is news to me, sir! Catatonia, as far as I knew, is a psychological term – it denotes the loss of verbal facility which usually ensues from a protracted trauma. Or, in my case, from a three-year bout with Beelzebub (and a sizeable dollup of post-abortive anguish mixed in) that crashed to its final fruition….or something like that. It was quite ghastly to constantly be accused of taking drugs…..when I had never taken drugs. But I guess that “1978 – A Space (Cadet’s) Odyssey” was my theme song for a couple years, at any rate. And it wasn’t fun – and hardly honeymoon material
In any case, I’m happy for your son’s friend that his experience was vastly disparate from my own. Now, I mean that: I am not a jealous person – don’t have room in my life for that cosmic cant. Even if I don’t see the connection between Catatonia and a romantic idyll – now that REALLY blew my mind!
Sincerely,
Lucy In The Sky With(out) Diamonds
Bird, I stand corrected!
Our son has just informed me that that was Caledonia; over one of his siblings’ boombox as he was telling us about it, they sounded so much alike! Kids! I might have known; I was vaguely familiar with the term “catatonic” referring to a less-than-desirable medical state of some sort, but I didn’t connect the two and I didn’t think anyone still referred to present-day Ireland that way.
Sorry for your troubles; get well soon!
Axiom:
Thank you for your concern – but those “troubles” were decades in the past. I’ve been largely recovered from that travesty since the summer of 1981. I mean, really now: Do I SOUND catatonic? I’ve come a long way since the days when I thought “date rape” meant the theft of some edible entity from my 1974 Datsun – and the sun still set in the East.
Bird,
I don’t think arx said you sounded catatonic; you only said you were heading there. So your point would be…?
Keep improving.
Oh, shucks, Axiom:
I feel like I’m taking a test I didn’t know I was supposed to be taking!
Is this a pop quiz? Do I get graded at the end? ‘Cause when I used to get straight A’s in school I used to place the letters “in’t I smart?” after the big, fat “A” the teacher would scrawl on my graded exams.
Haven’t I improved in eloquence since then? Please say yes – a woman’s psyche is a delicate thing……
A bomb is a delicate thing too, in it’s way…but shouldn’t be allowed to dictate all one’s decisions, should it?
For the record and what it’s worth:
No, I didn’t say “fun” in any of my posts, and no, this isn’t a test: your responses to our other posts contraindicate that at this time…!
And you still haven’t answered my question.
Arx:
Please don’t compare my psyche to a bomb! I’m pacifistic in the extreme, and I cannot apologize for abhorring violence in any form it takes. I’m sorry – you didn’t use the word “fun” in your earlier posts – you said “have a nice time” in the Forum, or something like that, didn’t you?
In any event, I took some Nyquil earlier today for a head cold, and I’m still a little foggy. What question have I failed to answer? A mind is a terrible thing to waste……
arx
while i appreciate your prolife commitment, i must say that you come across as insufferably pompous and arrogant. it seems that if people disagree with you even slightly, then they are obviously idiots who don’t have a clue. a little humility would go a long way in some of your posts….
now, on this business about paul hill, who really cares? he’s dead, and what happened is irrelevant now. you can go back and try to argue what should have been all you want, but it changes nothing. paul hill hurt our cause, and anyone who raises his name in veneration is in an extraordinary minority. whatever his attributes and good qualities (no doubt he had both), they were obliterated by his violent actions. and i think the best way to remember paul hill is as an example of what NOT to do to end abortion. you say your question wasn’t answered – i say your whole point is totally irrelevant and has absolutely nothing to do with the original topic of this post.
now, as for you kelly, what planet do you hail from? you tell me i should ‘be ashamed’. what for? i used no one as a ‘human shield’ and i didn’t attack arx – i simply answered his post.
you need to read more carefully before you react in such a knee jerk fashion, without a shred of support for your allegations. my posts were respectful of the prolife position that is consistent with about 99% of american prolifers. i remain confused about your position, after reading and re-reading your post a couple of times. try and be a bit more clear with your points, by say, referring to the phrasing or sentence that offended you and then answering that with specifics, instead of wide, sweeping statements that seek to indict me as some sort of insensitive clod.
i would venture to say that i’ve been more active in prolife work than you have over the last 32 years, and understand the issue as well as anyone. for one thing, i understand that we won’t defeat abortion by using paul hill’s method, and that was the whole point of my responses to arx.
now, can we roll up our sleeves and work to fight the evil of abortion instead of reminiscing about paul hill?
Jerry:
I agree with your post – I certainly didn’t believe that you were using abortive (or post-abortive) women as a “shield.”
And I would surely never underestimate your pro-life activism of many years.
I always wish to be respectful of others’ posts, and it’s very possible I mis-read or mis-interpreted Mr. Axiom’s original message. I’m afraid my intense anti-violence stance comes to the fore here – a stance that has only been clarified and deepened by recent research on my part.
Just an FYI here: To further buttress my own views, I have been perusing the Priests For Life website and many of Father Pavone’s essays. He is, to be sure, a very eloquent and intelligent champion of life in all its stages. In one treatise, he mentioned an elderly woman who declared, “I don’t need to be concerned about abortion, since I’m past the age of childbearing.”
I’m not an old crone – not yet (although I may be soon): but the fact remains that apathy and hardened hearts are dangerous, very dangerous. And it’s something none of us afford, not in these times.
The question was whether or not prolifers who condemn Paul Hill (and tend, like jerry & others, to castigate any who don’t)would likewise condemn the Warsaw Ghetto uprising and if so, on what grounds? It’s an honest question and a valid one; (the matter of using lethal force to defend innocent life is the principle behind the 2nd amendment and the WGU, and is not without biblical backing and precedent)and does not constitute some undue veneration of Paul Hill.
I have my own personal reasons why I would, as stated before, not act as he did and would most likely have discouraged him in his own act given the opportunity (one can never be absolutely certain, and I was not given the opportunity).
I would ask your forgiveness, Jerry, for being more concerned with THE FACT THAT AN AMERICAN CITIZEN HAS NOW BEEN EXECUTED, WITHOUT TRIAL, FOR POLITICAL DISSIDENCE (as outlined in the original and essentially unanswered post)than with how I come across to you or anyone else (who happens not to be God, or likely to suffer unjust/undue personal injury as a result of my posts)in saying so, but since I don’t see sounding alarms when there is a corresponding danger as a wrong, I shall refrain…
Now that you bring it up again, though, you sought to discredit the bus (Ok, make it a playground if you want) analogy because women “choose” to enter abortion mills; and yes, in a sense, I think that did rather put the woman in the sort of hostage position the population control gurus planned in coining the phrase “a woman’s choice”. It was never about giving her a real choice; it was about making a holocaust levelled at innocent children irresistably attractive to their parents…the better to…but that much I think you know. In addition to my previous comment on that, it might be pointed out that Paul Hill was careful to not endanger any women, unlike some others who have launched attacks at death camp facilities and workers without distinguishing between violence (which initially violates an essential right of the victim) and lethal force, which is sometimes necessary to stop violence against innocent parties.
Finally, Jerry, having read many of your posts on many topics, I don’t see that you exude sufficient humility as to suggest that you have any to share with me! Maybe in 32 more years…who knows?! stranger things have happened!
Speaking of holocausts, though, I’m reading a fascinating book by a survivor of the Nazi holocaust. It’s called “Messengers of God”, written by Elie Wiesel, and, although Wiesel and I differ on some points, I highly recommend it to anyone wanting more insight into life in general, Judaic history and tradition particularly, and especially why the anti-Semitism on the part of Hitler and other megalomaniacs…
Shalom!
arx
as to whether i exude sufficient humility, i would only say that confidence when one is absolutely sure one is right can come across as being less than humble. to that, guilty as charged.
in your case, i was simply pointing out that since this post is not about paul hill and has absolutely nothing to do with paul hill, that it was a waste of time for you to go over the same tired questions about whether or not he was executed unjustly or not. it’s irrelevant to this or any other post on the ORW site. besides, you seem ambiguous about the rightness or wrongness of his actions, in essence, straddling the fence, morally, as to whether he was wrong or right. i see no gray here. he was wrong, plain and simple.
as far the comparisons to other times in history where violence may or may not have been justified, i don’t think you can make the case that cloning paul hill throughout the prolife movement and emulating his tactics would be a successful endeavor. two wrongs don’t make a right, if you will. killing people to help society understand that killing babies is wrong doesn’t seem to have a great deal of moral clarity or clout, to say the least.
and so, to conclude, i won’t need 32 more years to know that paul hill was wrong, and is best forgotten.
I didn’t try to make the case you suggested, and you STILL didn’t answer my question(?!)…just tried, as usual, to further second-guess and damn me for daring to differ with yourSELF. (Why plead guilty when you haven’t committed the act, and you’ve no one else to protect ?!) But don’t feel alone; neither has anyone else of whom I’ve asked it. My point was primarily THAT AN AMERICAN CITIZEN HAS NOW BEEN EXECUTED, WITHOUT TRIAL, FOR POLITICAL DISSIDENCE…a much more fundamentally dangerous precedent than a man using lethal force to defend innocent human life. I don’t think anyone has sought to imitate him since, unless I have a date or two mixed up; where incarceration and execution for political dissidence will lead if allowed to continue unchecked…I don’t think it will take 32 years to figure out.
arx.
To anyone who’s made it this far (!)…there’s a rather resonant article reflecting on the Inaugural/Roe week juxtaposition…see http://www.anncoulter.com and, if it isn’t still on the home page when you get to the site, look in articles/archives and click on “Where’s that Religious Fanatic We Elected?”. . .and read it.